Letters: Headline leaves reader CrossFit to be tied

Published 6:05 pm, Thursday, July 11, 2013

Thursday's above-the-fold Trending article "Where the CrossFit Gyms Are" leads with the headline "1-percenters workout" with the subhead stating "Military-style fitness programs gain popularity among affluent, but some see trappings of elitism."

I went on to read the entire piece and the only portion that speaks to such "elitism" is the following sentence: "In addition to concerns about injuries, CrossFit has also been criticized for elitism, with membership makeup consisting of one-percenters."

Criticized by whom? Where is the research? How can the author make such a statement without data?

The piece continues "But on that Monday night in early July, there were three people in the 5 p.m. class: A 32-year-old registered nurse; a 36-year-old teacher and a 55-year-old North Stamford resident, all grunting as they thrust metal barbells over their heads."

So a nurse and a teacher are now so-called "1-percenters?" Oh, the 55-year-old North Stamford resident -- right, he is from North Stamford, so obviously he is a "1-percenter," got it.

I have never been to a CrossFit gym, I barely understand hedge funds and I have no idea where hedge fund managers go to work out ­-- nor do I care and why should anyone for that matter? What I do know is The Advocate with its blaring headline and more specifically the author with her continued efforts is enamored with attempting to create a socio-economic divide where none exists.

I read Mort Walker's recent Letter To The Editor hoping to read a realistic solution to the problem of slave labor (July 5). However, with all due respect to Walker, who is the creator of the comic strip "Beetle Bailey," his proposed solution is simply a fantasy not based in reality, much like his comic strip.

Yes, we should avoid purchasing products from countries that employ slave labor. But there are a few problems with this approach. Who decides when working conditions equate with slave labor? Do we? How can we dictate how other countries should operate? We don't own, or rule, the world. Just because a foreign country is allowing working conditions that we consider objectionable they may be the equivalent of middle class to those workers.

Also, how do we "ban importing any product made under these conditions?" Won't this result in a trade war with other countries? What if the World Trade Organization (WTO) rules against us in a trade dispute when we ban products from another country? What then? Do we leave the WTO? Do we remove a ban on importing products from another country that still allows working conditions that we consider to be slave labor but the WTO does not?

As for raising worker's pay, won't that result in factories opening up in lower paying countries? Won't working conditions then suffer as jobs leave their country? It would be nice if we could create more jobs in America, especially manufacturing jobs, but how do we take "over producing some of their own products?" Do we open up factories in those countries and pay higher wages? How would we compete with factories that open up in lower paying countries? Do we open up more factories in this country to employ our own people? The very reasons those factories shut down and moved out of this country still exist. So why would a company open up new factories in America when they can open them up in countries where the labor is cheap and business regulations are accommodative instead of un-accommodative?